DOCSLIB.ORG

Prison and Planned Parenthood? Prisoners and The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prison and Planned Parenthood? Prisoners and The QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON Prison and Planned Parenthood? Prisoners and the Conception of a Right to Procreate. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Mary Yarwood 1 Statement of Originality I, Mary Kathleen Yarwood, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged below and my contribution indicated. Previously published material is also acknowledged below. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the College has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. Signature: Date 28th July 2015. 2 Abstract The decision to have a child is normally considered a private matter between consenting adults. The state only intervenes if individuals require medical treatment to conceive. The ability to choose if, and indeed when, to have children is recognised as an important human right. In contrast, prisoners inhabit a public space where all decisions regarding procreation are subject to public scrutiny. In the USA, prisoners are completely prohibited from procreating, unless they are granted the privilege of private visits. In contrast, in Dickson, the European Court of Human Rights recognised that prisoners retain all of their convention rights, including the right to a private and family life. Rights can only be restricted if necessary and the restriction must be proportionate to the objective that the state is trying to achieve. This thesis will examine the question of whether prisoners should retain a right to procreate and whether restricting prisoners from procreating should form a part of their punishment. Many characteristics of the Victorian penal regime including isolation from family members and the concept of ‘less-eligibility’ continue to affect how prisoners in England and Wales and the USA are treated. Prohibiting prisoners from procreating is often justified as part of a prisoner’s punishment. Many argue that it is a direct consequence of imprisonment. Alternatively, if one accepts the premise that prisoners retain all of their human rights apart from the right to freedom, then there appears to be little justification for removing their right to procreate in most cases. Removing the right to procreate is in effect an additional method of punishing the offender that is not 3 explicitly stated as part of the prisoner’s sentence and is normally given very little consideration by prison officials or by government authorities. 4 Table of Contents STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY 2 ABSTRACT 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 12 TABLE OF CASES 13 AUSTRALIA 13 ENGLAND AND WALES 13 EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS 13 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 14 TABLE OF STATUTES AND NATIONAL LEGAL SOURCES 16 AUSTRALIA 16 ENGLAND AND WALES 16 SWEDEN 16 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 17 THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 17 FEDERAL STATUTES 17 STATE STATUTES 17 TABLE OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 18 TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS 18 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS 19 5 METHODOLOGY 21 DEFINING THE QUESTION: DO PRISONERS HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO PROCREATE WHILST IN PRISON? 21 THE LITERATURE REVIEW: IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES AND DOCTRINAL RESEARCH 23 CATEGORIES, CODING AND DATA ANALYSIS 26 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 28 SUMMARY 30 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 31 INTRODUCTION 31 HUMAN RIGHTS 44 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE RIGHTS 46 AUTONOMY, PRIVACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS 48 EUGENICS: CONTROL OF OFFENDER’S FERTILITY AND MODERN BIOLOGICAL CRIMINOLOGY. 49 DEVELOPMENT OF THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT IN THE UK 51 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT IN THE USA 53 BIOLOGICAL CRIMINOLOGY AND THE LEGACY OF EUGENICS 60 SUMMARY 65 CHAPTER THREE: THE PRISON 69 INTRODUCTION 69 PUNISHMENT AND THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF IMPRISONMENT 70 PUNISHMENT AND PENITENCE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODERN PRISON 74 THE ‘PRISON’ BEFORE REFORM 74 PUNISHMENT AND PENITENCE: THE VICTORIAN PRISON 78 THE PRISON TODAY 80 6 THE PAINS OF IMPRISONMENT 83 THE DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY 83 THE LOSS OF POSSESSIONS AND SERVICES 84 THE DEPRIVATION OF HETEROSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS 85 THE DEPRIVATION OF AUTONOMY 85 DEPRIVATION OF SECURITY 85 OTHER PAINS’ OF IMPRISONMENT: PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT AND UNCERTAINTY 86 SUMMARY 89 CHAPTER FOUR: CASE LAW REVIEW- ENGLAND AND WALES 92 INTRODUCTION 92 LEGAL BACKGROUND TO PRISONER PROCREATION IN ENGLAND AND WALES 94 THE MELLOR CASE 96 HIGH COURT: FIRST INSTANCE REFUSAL 97 COURT OF APPEAL DECISION 99 THE DICKSON CASE 100 THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT 102 DICKSON V UK 104 CHAMBER RULING 104 GRAND CHAMBER RULING 107 SUMMARY 112 CHAPTER FIVE: CASE LAW REVIEW- THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 114 INTRODUCTION 114 LEGAL BACKGROUND TO PRISONER PROCREATION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 116 THE GOODWIN CASE 118 7 THE DISTRICT COURT RULING 119 COURT OF APPEAL RULING (EIGHTH CIRCUIT) 121 THE PERCY CASE 123 THE RULING 124 GERBER CASE 125 GERBER 1 126 GERBER II 129 GERBER III 132 SUMMARY 143 CHAPTER SIX: JOINT ANALYSIS OF CASES 146 INTRODUCTION 146 THE RIGHT OF THE PRISONER TO PROCREATE 150 THE RIGHTS OF THE PRISONER’S PARTNER 157 LEGITIMATE PENOLOGICAL OBJECTIVES 161 WELFARE OF THE CHILD AND JUDGMENTS ABOUT PARENTAL SUITABILITY 167 GENDER AND PRISONER REPRODUCTION 173 PUNISHMENT AND CIVIL DEATH 179 SUMMARY 183 CHAPTER SEVEN: PUNISHMENT 187 INTRODUCTION 187 DEFINITIONS OF PUNISHMENT 192 THE PURPOSE OF THE INSTITUTION OF PUNISHMENT: WHY PUNISH? 194 UTILITARIAN JUSTIFICATIONS 195 RETRIBUTION 202 8 REHABILITATION 206 LEGALISTIC JUSTIFICATIONS OF PUNISHMENT 208 FACTORS AFFECTING THE APPLICATION OF PUNISHMENT 210 PRISON, DEGRADATION AND THE PURPOSE OF PUNISHMENT 215 PUNISHMENT AND CIVIL DEATH 220 SUMMARY 227 CHAPTER EIGHT: REPRODUCTION AND PARENTING OUTSIDE OF PRISON 230 INTRODUCTION 230 AUTONOMY AND THE RIGHT TO PROCREATE. 233 FERTILITY TREATMENT 239 RIGHT TO BEAR 240 RIGHT TO REAR 243 THE MOTHER 248 THE FATHER 252 SUMMARY 256 CHAPTER NINE: PRISONERS AND PARENTHOOD FROM PRISON 258 INTRODUCTION 258 CHILD WELFARE 261 CAUSES OF ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES IN CHILDREN FOLLOWING PARENTAL INCARCERATION 265 TRAUMA THEORIES 265 STRAIN THEORIES 266 LABELLING/ STIGMA THEORIES 267 MODELLING AND SOCIAL LEARNING THEORIES 268 EFFECTS OF PARENTAL INCARCERATION ON CHILDREN 269 9 RISK OF IMPRISONMENT 269 MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS 273 POORER ACADEMIC OUTCOMES 275 PRISONERS PARENTING FROM PRISON 275 WOMEN PRISONERS AND OBSTACLES TO PREGNANCY 278 WOMEN PRISONERS AND OBSTACLES TO PARENTING 280 MALE PRISONERS AND OBSTACLES TO PARENTING 282 AMELIORATING THE EFFECTS OF IMPRISONMENT 284 ATTACHMENT BASED INTERVENTIONS 284 STRAIN THEORY BASED INTERVENTIONS 289 INADEQUATE PARENTING/ STRAINED CARE GIVING INTERVENTIONS 290 INTERVENTIONS BASED UPON STIGMA THEORIES 292 SUMMARY 293 CHAPTER TEN: CONCLUSIONS 297 INTRODUCTION 297 MAIN CONCLUSIONS 299 HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO PROCREATE 300 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 301 THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF PRISONERS AND THEIR FAMILIES 302 WELFARE OF THE CHILD CONCERNS 306 EUGENICS AND BIOLOGICAL CRIMINOLOGY 307 LESS ELIGIBILITY AND THE PAINS OF IMPRISONMENT. 309 PUNISHMENT 311 CIVIL DEATH 314 PARENTING FROM PRISON 316 10 SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORM 319 FUTURE POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THIS RESEARCH 323 APPENDIX FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST 326 BIBLIOGRAPHY 331 11 Acknowledgements Firstly I would like to thank Queen Mary, University of London for giving me the opportunity of studying for the PhD and for providing me with funding and support. I would also like to thank my principal supervisor Professor Richard Ashcroft for his patience, encouragement and thoughtful ideas. My thanks also goes to Dr Leonidas Cheliotis, my secondary supervisor who provided me with invaluable guidance in the field of penology. I would also like to remember my first medical law teacher Stuart Andrews. He was an inspirational teacher who always went out of his way to help and who inspired me to continue my studies after graduating from my LLB. I would also like to give my thanks to Arthur, Evelyn and Isaac who have been with me for the whole of my PhD journey and whose support has kept me going. 12 Table of Cases Australia Castles v Secretary to the Department of Justice & Ors [2010] VSC 310 (9 July 2010) (Supreme Court, Australia) Patient Review Panel v ABY & ABZ [2012] VSCA 264 (Supreme Court, Victoria) England and Wales A (Medical Treatment: Sterilisation) Re, [2000] 1 FLR 549 Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corporation [1947] 1 KB 223 Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1985] AC 374 CP (A Child) v CICA [2014] EWCA Civ 1554 D (A Child Appearing by Her Guardian Ad Litem), Re (Respondent) [2002] 2 FLR 843 D (A Child Appearing by Her Guardian Ad Litem), Re (Respondent) [2005] UKHL 33 Dickson and Dickson v Premier Prison Service Ltd and Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWCA Civ 1477 F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation), Re [1990] 2 AC 1 R v Secretary of State for the Home Department,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • PUNISHMENT, PRISON and the PUBLIC AUSTRALIA the Law Book Company Ltd
    THE HAMLYN LECTURES TWENTY-THIRD SERIES PUNISHMENT, PRISON AND THE PUBLIC AUSTRALIA The Law Book Company Ltd. Sydney : Melbourne : Brisbane CANADA AND U.S.A. The Carswell Company Ltd. Agincourt, Ontario INDIA N. M. Tripathi Private Ltd. Bombay ISRAEL Steimatzky's Agency Ltd. Jerusalem : Tel Aviv : Haifa MALAYSIA : SINGAPORE : BRUNEI Malayan Law Journal (Pte) Ltd. Singapore NEW ZEALAND Sweet & Maxwell (N.Z.) Ltd. Wellington PAKISTAN Pakistan Law House Karachi PUNISHMENT, PRISON AND THE PUBLIC An Assessment of Penal Reform in Twentieth Century England by an Armchair Penologist BY RUPERT CROSS, D.C.L., F.B.A. Vinerian Professor of English Law in the University of Oxford Published under the auspices of THE HAMLYN TRUST LONDON STEVENS & SONS Published in 1971 by Stevens & Sons Limited of 11 New Fetter Lane in the City of London and printed in Great Britain by The Eastern Press Ltd. of London and Reading SBN Hardback 420 43790 8 Paperback 420 43800 9 Professor Cross 1971 CONTENTS The Hamlyn Lectures ....... viii The Hamlyn Trust xi Preface xiii Introduction xv I. BACKGROUND AND DRAMATIS PERSONAE . 1 1. The Gladstone Report .... 1 2. Sir Edmund Du Cane 7 Convict Prisons ..... 7 Local Prisons ...... 9 Hard Labour 10 The Du Cane Regime . .11 Du Cane as a penologist and a person . 13 3. Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brise . .16 Prison Conditions 17 The avoidance of imprisonment . 19 Individualisation of punishment and indeterminacy of sentence ... 22 Ruggles-Brise as a penologist and a person 27 4. Sir Alexander Paterson .... 29 Career and Personality .... 30 Paterson as a penologist.... 33 5. Sir Lionel Fox .....
    [Show full text]
  • London Metropolitan Archives Middlesex Sessions
    LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 1 MIDDLESEX SESSIONS: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MA Reference Description Dates COUNTY ADMINISTRATION: LUNATIC ASYLUMS Maintenance of lunatics MA/A/C/001 Alphabetical register of lunatics, giving name, 1860 - 1888 date of admission, which asylum, 'how disposed of' MA/A/C/002 Register of lunatics Gives name, date of 1871 - 1877 maintenance order, to what asylum sent, 'how disposed of' MA/A/C/003/1853 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1853 8 MA/A/C/003/1865 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1865 53 MA/A/C/003/1866 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1866 73 MA/A/C/003/1867 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1867 46 MA/A/C/003/1868 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1868 47 MA/A/C/003/1869 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1869 64 MA/A/C/003/1870 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1870 8 MA/A/C/003/1872 Applications for maintenance of lunatics: 1872 Criminal lunatics 8 MA/A/C/003/1873 Applications for maintenance of lunatics: 1873 Matilda or Louisa Lewis 1 MA/A/C/003/1874 Applications for maintenance of lunatics 1874 6 LONDON METROPOLITAN ARCHIVES Page 2 MIDDLESEX SESSIONS: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION MA Reference Description Dates MA/A/C/003/1875/001 Applications for maintenance of lunatics (B-E) 1875 (items numbered 1875/001-024) MA/A/C/003/1875/025 Applications for maintenance of lunatics (E-M) 1875 (items numbered 1875/025-047) MA/A/C/003/1875/048 Applications for maintenance of lunatics (M-R) 1875 (items numbered 1875/048-060) MA/A/C/003/1875/061 Applications for maintenance
    [Show full text]
  • Prison Act 1952 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 03 April 2019
    Changes to legislation: Prison Act 1952 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 03 April 2019. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Prison Act 1952 1952 CHAPTER 52 15 and 16 Geo 6 and 1 Eliz 2 An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to prisons and other institutions for offenders and related matters with corrections and improvements made under the Consolidation of Enactments (Procedure) Act 1949. [1st August 1952] Annotations: Extent Information E1 For the extent of this Act see s. 55(3)(4)(5) Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 By Criminal Justice Act 1991 (c. 53, SIF 39:1), s. 10(1), Sch. 12 para. 23; S.I. 1991/2208, art. 2(1), Sch. 1 it is provided (14.10.1991) that in relation to any time before the commencement of s. 70 of that 1991 Act (which came into force on 1.10.1992 by S.I. 1992/333, art. 2(2), Sch. 2) references in any enactment amended by that 1991 Act, to youth courts shall be construed as references to juvenile courts. C2 Act applied (3.11.1994) by 1994 c. 33, ss. 7(2)(4), 172(4) Act applied (3.11.1994) by 1994 c. 33, ss. 8(2), 172(4) C3 Act amended (1.10.1997) by 1997 c. 43, s. 41, Sch. 1 Pt. III para.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Foundations of Tribunals in Nineteenth-Century England
    LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF TRIBUNALS IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY ENGLAND Nineteenth-century governments faced considerable challenges from the rapid, novel and profound changes in social and economic conditions resulting from the industrial revolution. In the context of an increasingly sophisticated and complex government, from the 1830s the specialist and largely lay statutory tribunal was conceived and adopted as the principal method of both implementing the new regulatory legislation and resolving disputes, between the state and the subject, or between subject and subject. The tribunal’s legal nature and procedures, and its place in the machinery of justice, were debated and refined throughout the Victorian period. In examining this process, this book explains the interaction between legal constraints, social and economic demand and political expediency which gave rise to this form of dispute-resolution. It reveals the imagination and creativity of legislators who drew on diverse legal institutions and values to create the new tribunals, and shows how the modern difficulties of legal classification and analysis were largely the result of the institution’s nineteenth-century development. Chantal Stebbings is Professor of Law and Legal History at the University of Exeter. Her research is in the commercial legal history of the nineteenth century, with special reference to the law of taxation, trusts and commercial property. She has written extensively in this field, including The Private Trustee in Victorian England (Cambridge University Press, 2002). CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN ENGLISH LEGAL HISTORY Edited by j. h. baker Fellow of St Catharine’s College, Cambridge Recent series of titles include The Rise and Fall of the English Ecclesiastical Courts, 1500–1860 R.
    [Show full text]
  • Armed Forces Repeal Proposals
    LAW COMMISSION STATUTE LAW REVISION Gaols Repeal Proposals April 2006 BACKGROUND NOTES ON STATUTE LAW REVISION What is it? 1. Statute law revision is the process of repealing statutes that are no longer of practical utility. The purpose is to modernise and simplify the statute book, thereby reducing its size and thus saving the time of lawyers and others who use it. This in turn helps to avoid unnecessary costs. It also stops people being misled by obsolete laws that masquerade as live law. If an Act features still in the statute book and is referred to in text-books, people reasonably enough assume that it must mean something. Who does it? 2. The work of statute law revision is carried out by the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission pursuant to section 3(1) of the Law Commissions Act 1965. Section 3(1) imposes a duty on both Commissions to keep the law under review “with a view to its systematic development and reform, including in particular ... the repeal of obsolete and unnecessary enactments, the reduction of the number of separate enactments and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law”. Statute Law (Repeals) Bill 3. Implementation of the Commissions’ statute law revision proposals is by means of special Statute Law (Repeals) Bills. 17 such Bills have been enacted since 1965 repealing more than 2000 whole Acts and achieving partial repeals in thousands of others. Broadly speaking the remit of a Statute Law (Repeals) Bill extends to any enactment passed at Westminster. Accordingly it is capable of repealing obsolete statutory text throughout the United Kingdom (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislation Part 1
    MIL-10005 MIL-10006 MIL-10007 MIL-10008 MIL-10009 MIL-10010 MIL-10011 MIL-10012 MIL-10013 Prevention of Crime Act, 1908. [8 EDW. 7.OH. 59.] ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. A.D. 1908. FART I. REFORMATION OF YOUNG OFFENDERS. Section. 1. Power of court to pass sentence of detention in Borstal Institution. 2.Application to reformatory school offerices. 3.Power to transfer from prison to Borstal Institution. 4. Establishment of Borstal Institutions. 5.Power to release on licence. 6. Supervision after expiration of term of sentence. 7. Transfer of incorrigibles, &c. to prison. 8,Treasury contributions towards expensesofsocieties assisting, &c. persons discharged from Borstal Insti- tutions. 9. Removal from one part of the United Kingdom to another. PART II. DETENTION OF HABITUAL CRIMINALS. 10.Power of court to pass sentence of preventive detention in addition to penal servitude. 11.Appeal against sentence to Court of Criminal Appeal. 12.Power in certain cases to commute penal servitude to preventive detention. 13. Detention in prison of persons undergoing preventive detention. 14. Power to discharge on licence. 15. Provisions as to persons placed out on licence. 16.Power to discharge absolutely. A 1 MIL-10014 [OFf. 59.] Preventionof Crime Act, 1908. [8 7.] A.D. 1908. PART III. GENERAL. Section. 17.Application to Scotland. 18.Application to Ireland. 19.Short title and commencement. SCHEDULE. 2 MIL-10015 [8 EDW. 7.] Prevention of Crime Act, 1908. [Cu. 59.] CHAPTER 59. An Act to make better provision for the prevention A.D. 1908. of crime, and for that purpose to provide for the ref ormation of Young Offenders and the prolonged detention of Habitual Criminals, and for other purposes incidental thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Statute Law Repeals Bill
    The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM. No. 150) (SCOT. LAW COM. No. 99) STATUTE LAW REVISION TWELFTH REPORT DRAFT STATUTE LAW (REPEALS) BILL Presented to Parliament by the Lord High Chancellor and the Lord Advocate by Command of Her Majesty November 1985 LONDON HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE €6.70 net Cmnd. 9648 The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissionersare: The Honourable Mr. Justice Beldam,* Chairman Mr. Trevor M. Adridge Mr. Brian J. Davenport, Q.C. Professor Julian Farrand Mrs. Brenda Hoggett The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr. J. G. H. Gasson and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WClN 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Maxwell, Chairman Mr. R. D. D. Bertram, W.S. Dr. E. M. Clive Mr. J. Murray, Q.C. SheriffC. G. B. Nicholson, Q.C. The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Mr. R. Eadie and its offices are at 140Causewayside, Edinburgh EG9 IPR. * As from 1 October 1985. .. 11 THE LAW COMMISSION AND THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION Statute Law Revision: Twelfth Report Draft Statute Law (Repeals) Bill To the Right Honourable the Lord Hailsham of St. Marylebone, C.H., Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, and the Right Honourable the Lord Cameronof Lochbroom,Q.C., Her Majesty’s Advocate. In pursuance of section 3( l)(d) of the Law CommissionsAct 1965,we have prepared the draft Bill which is Appendix 1 and recommend that effect be given to the proposals contained in it.
    [Show full text]
  • Prison Act 1952 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 03 July 2021
    Status: Point in time view as at 21/05/1997. Changes to legislation: Prison Act 1952 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 03 July 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Prison Act 1952 1952 CHAPTER 52 15 and 16 Geo 6 and 1 Eliz 2 An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to prisons and other institutions for offenders and related matters with corrections and improvements made under the Consolidation of Enactments (Procedure) Act 1949. [1st August 1952] Extent Information E1 For the extent of this Act see s. 55(3)(4)(5) Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 By Criminal Justice Act 1991 (c. 53, SIF 39:1), s. 10(1), Sch. 12 para. 23; S.I. 1991/2208, art. 2(1), Sch. 1 it is provided (14.10.1991) that in relation to any time before the commencement of s. 70 of that 1991 Act (which came into force on 1.10.1992 by S.I. 1992/333, art. 2(2), Sch. 2) references in any enactment amended by that 1991 Act, to youth courts shall be construed as references to juvenile courts. C2 Act applied (3.11.1994) by 1994 c. 33, ss. 7(2)(4), 172(4) Act applied (3.11.1994) by 1994 c. 33, ss. 8(2), 172(4) C3 Act amended (1.10.1997) by 1997 c.
    [Show full text]
  • (2012) Criminalisation of Children in Scotland 1840- 1910. Phd Thesis
    Kelly, Christine (2012) Criminalisation of children in Scotland 1840- 1910. PhD thesis http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3601/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] CRIMINALISATION OF CHILDREN IN SCOTLAND 1840-1910 Christine Marie Kelly Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree for PhD School of Law College of Social Sciences University of Glasgow April 2012 ABSTRACT This thesis draws on a wide range of primary sources in order to explore the criminalisation of children in nineteenth century Scotland. The analysis is set in the context of far-reaching changes in the administration of criminal justice including the expansion of urban policing, alterations in criminal procedure and legislative developments. Against this background the thesis examines the impact of pragmatic, religiously inspired philanthropy on reform of juvenile justice in Scotland and argues that Scottish reformers in the 1840s and 1850s achieved a remarkable degree of success in setting up a unique pre-statutory national experiment to deal with juvenile offenders. This innovative diversionary system was based upon the concept of the day industrial school, first set up by Sheriff William Watson in Aberdeen in the early 1840s.
    [Show full text]
  • Statute Law Repeals: Eighteenth Report Draft Statute Law (Repeals) Bill
    The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM No 308) (SCOT LAW COM No 210) STATUTE LAW REPEALS: EIGHTEENTH REPORT DRAFT STATUTE LAW (REPEALS) BILL Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice by Command of Her Majesty Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers January 2008 Cm 7303 SG/2008/4 £xx.xx The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Etherton, Chairman Mr Stuart Bridge Mr David Hertzell Professor Jeremy Horder Mr Kenneth Parker QC The interim Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Mr William Arnold.1 The Law Commission is located at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Drummond Young, Chairman Professor George L Gretton Professor Gerard Maher QC Professor Joseph M Thomson Mr Colin J Tyre QC The Chief Executive of the Scottish Law Commission is Mr Michael Lugton. The Scottish Law Commission is located at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh, EH9 1PR. The terms of this report were agreed on 3 December 2007 The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk 1 At the date the report was signed, Steve Humphreys was Chief Executive of the Law Commission. William Arnold was appointed interim Chief Executive with effect from 7 January 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law and Penology of Prison Discipline
    Durham E-Theses The law and penology of prison discipline Quinn, Peter Michael How to cite: Quinn, Peter Michael (1989) The law and penology of prison discipline, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/6459/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk THE LAW AND PENOLOGY OF PRISON DISCIPLINE VOLUME ONE (OF TWO VOLUMES) PETER MICHAEL QUINN BACHELOR OF CIVIL LAW UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM DEPARTMENT OF LAW 1989 The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be pubh'shed without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. 2 5 JAN 1990 ABSTRACT THE LAW AND PENOLOGY OF PRISON DISCIPLINE ; PETER M. QUINN The study is of the disciplinary systems within the prisons of England and Wales. It concerns the response of the courts to prison matters brought before them and examines the effects upon prison life of an increasing demand for adherence to the rules of natural justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Prison Act, 1952 15 & 16 GEO
    Prison Act, 1952 15 & 16 GEO. 6 & l Euz. 2. CH. 52 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Central administration Section 1. General control over prisons. 2. The Prison Commissioners. 3. Officers and servants of Prison Commissioners. 4. General duties of Prison Commissioners. 5. Annual report of Prison Commissioners. Visiting committees and boards of visitors 6. Visiting. committees and boards of visitors.. Prison officers 7. Prison officers. 8. Powers of prison officers. 9. Exercise of office of chaplain. 10. Appointment of prison ministers. 11. Ejectment of prison officers and their families refusing to quit. Confinement and treatment of prisoners 12. Place of confinement of prisoners. 13. Legal custody of prisoner. 14. Cells. 15. Separation of male and female prisoners. 16. Photographing and measuring of prisoners. 17. Painful tests. 18. Corporal punishment in prisons. 19. Right df justice to visit prison. 20. Duty of governor to deliver calendar of prisoners. 21. Expenses of conveyance to prison. 22. Removal of prisoners for judicial and other purposes. 23. Power of constable etc. to act outside his jurisdiction. A CH. 52 Prison Act, 1952 15 & 16 GEO. 6 &1ELiz.2 Length of sentence, release on licence and temporary discharge Section 24. Calculation of term of sentence. 25. Remission for good conduct and release on licence of persons sentenced to terms of imprisonment. 26. Release on licence of persons sentenced to corrective training or preventive detention. 27. Release on licence of persons serving imprisonment for life. 28. Power of Secretary of State to discharge prisoners tempor- arily on account of ill health. Discharged prisoners 29. Notification of address by discharged prisoners.
    [Show full text]